memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Klach D'kel Brakt
Description How do we know this refers to a star and does not simply mark the location of the Briar Patch? JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 01:14, November 8, 2017 (UTC) :The Briar Patch appears on the star chart, along with KDB.--Memphis77 (talk) 01:42, November 8, 2017 (UTC) ::So what do we do now with the fact that we have two places known canonically as Klach D'kel Brakt? The Battle of Klach D'kel Brakt could now refer to either of these places. Or do we ignore the map given that it was probably not meant to be studied this closely and go with what was in the dialogue? JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 01:59, November 8, 2017 (UTC) :If it was not meant to be studied closely, they would not focused on it as they did in the episode. We can, in the grand tradition of Star Trek fans, rationalize the disparity. For myself, I created the page for this star, with a note in bginfo noting the disparity.--Memphis77 (talk) 03:45, November 8, 2017 (UTC) Merge with Briar Patch I think this page should be merged with Briar Patch. That may not immediately sound intuitive, but I think it's what policy prescribes. Specifically, I'm talking about the order of precedence for in-universe resources. Basically, on one hand we have establishing that "Briar Patch" and "Klach D'kel Brakt" are different names for the same place (as agreed in earlier earlier discussion and strongly defended by the the author). On the other hand, we have a map upon which on close inspection we find both a "Briar Patch" and "Klach D'kel Brakt". Since the two facts don't seem compatible, and spoken dialog has precedence over visual material, I think the "Klach D'kel Brakt" label on the Discovery map should be treated merely as a visual error to be discussed in the background of Briar Patch. As I recall, this is hardly the first time a location was mentioned twice on a chart either, although I can't think of a case that is exactly the same. -- Capricorn (talk) 14:46, December 2, 2017 (UTC) :I wouldn't say I'm opposed per se, but (as an example) there are over 30 entities in the United States called "Washington County". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_County Why couldn't there be two places in the galaxy called "Klach D'kel Brakt"? 31dot (talk) 19:09, December 2, 2017 (UTC) That's possible, sure, much the way every reference to say Venus could refer to a completely different planet with that name. So why assume they're the same? YMMV as it's our most subjective policy, but in my view it's justified under MA:Use common sense, by way of Ockham's razor. As a bit of an aside, your concern strikes me as very similar to some of the discussion at the pages I've linked above: people wondered if the location mentioned in Enterprise was the same as in Insurrection just because both were called the Briar Patch. It's interesting reading. -- Capricorn (talk) 20:36, December 2, 2017 (UTC) :As you state above, though, in this case we have a map where one use of the name is clearly in a different location than the other use of the name(which isn't necessarily the case with Venus). If we didn't have that, then these would definitely need to be on the same page. The question is, is the map enough for establishing that. I'm still not sure yet. 31dot (talk) 12:17, December 3, 2017 (UTC) :: To make this discussion more confusing, I would like to point out that while the Briar Patch, Hromi Cluster and Paulson Nebula are shown as outlines on the map from Discovery, Klach D'kel Brakt is indicated with the same Klingon symbol as the other stars on the map. Perhaps this is the name of a star or star system, separate from the Briar Patch phenomenon, with one named after the other. - MK (t/ ) 00:02, January 3, 2018 (UTC)